Posted
by
Soulskillon Friday August 15, 2014 @01:43PM
from the my-dad-took-me-to-a-turtle-farm-before-i-could-play-super-mario dept.

Z00L00K sends this excerpt from The Local:
A Swedish father has come under fire for taking his two sons on a trip to Israel, the West Bank and occupied Syria in order to teach them the reality of war. [Carl-Magnus Helgegren is] a journalist, university teacher, and proactive dad. And like so many other dads, Helgegren had to have the violent video-game conversation with his two sons, Frank and Leo, aged ten and 11 respectively. "We were sitting at the dinner table last autumn, and my kids started telling me about this game they wanted to play, the latest Call of Duty game, and told me about the guns and missions," Helgegren told The Local on Friday. So Helgegren struck a deal. The family would take a trip to a city impacted by real war. The boys would meet people affected, do interviews, and visit a refugee camp. And when they came back home, they would be free to play whatever games they chose.

I love how people insist on commenting on what fathers or mothers do to teach their children about reality. If you did not hand them weapons or put them in the line of fire (keep in mind in some countries even that is perfectly acceptable for a 12 year old), then mind your own freekin beeswax. Why is this even a/. story?

Side note? I would do the same with my kids if I actually got up off my ass and stopped typing on computers for 10 minutes. Sad.

Why would this cure anyone of FPS BS? What correlation is there between FPS and real war? Who plays an FPS because they wanted to go to war, but didn't like travel?

I don't mind shooting up some virtual people, I want to be as far away from real war as I possibly can be. You can like, die there. And I hear that's not the worst possible outcome by far. Down here in Texas the number of people with missing limbs and purple heart license plates is staggering, especially considering what wars we're in aren't really that large scale.

Kids are going to grow up and say "Yeah, Dad is kind of a stick in the mud. We wanted to CoD:BLOps on a new XBox, and he took us to the West Bank and showed us decapitated people. We just went over to friend's houses to play games after that."

As a child, I had no issues seeing games for what they are. The same is true today. Parents need to parent and stop blaming games or anything else, for 'influence.' If you're not gonna parent, don't have kids.

call of duty != war. That's fine if he wants to take his kids to israel, but I think there are easier, cheaper ways to reality check his kids.

The headline is a bit blown out. He didn't take them quite so recently. It wasn't the full blow war zone it is now. He was a journalist and wanted to show his kids what the games they were playing were really based on. He showed them everything, refugee camps, idf soldiers. They even got to sit on a tank. They saw the wounded, sick, impoverished, and injured. They saw the effects of any war. That is valuable for people to learn. That when we commit troops and weapons to such a prospect, what the consequences are and who has to pay the price for that.

One on of my favourite games is Carmageddon. I do not drive, do not own a car, have no driver's license. I do enjoy driving a virtual car and mowing down old ladies, cops and various other pedestrians and cows. Should I get a driver's license and buy (or rent) a car to find out what real life driving is actually like? This guy is a tool.

What FPS BS? I deployed. I was under fire. Death was seen, bodies, human bones, discarded equipment with blood splotches, people shitting themselves, the whole nine yards. I still love FPS games. They are fun and are imaginary.

What FPS BS? I deployed. I was under fire. Death was seen, bodies, human bones, discarded equipment with blood splotches, people shitting themselves, the whole nine yards. I still love FPS games. They are fun and are imaginary.

I think the FPS BS is that "war is cool" and "fighting is awesome" - the over-glorification of war. Whereas well, REAL wars aren't fun. They're tragic wastes of human life and put real toll on people (soldiers and civilians alike). And for most wars, done because some person wanted so

I think these kids will avoid FPS games like the plague after this, but not because of any moral lesson, because there is almost none to be learned about FPSes here - since as you point out, FPSes are just games.

The real lesson will be "last time I asked dad for an FPS, he took us on an awful and depressing vacation of epic proportions, so I'm not going to touch them with a 30 foot pole now."

Would you do it if they were reading comic books about war? Watching movies? Watching 50s movies with John Wayne about war? Reading novels about war? Playing war in the yard? If they started playing cops and robbers in the back yard with the neighbor kids, is it time to haul them off to a Scared Straight session at a prison, to impress upon them the harsh realities of a life of crime?

This whole story is a tale of over-reaction that only seemed to have occurred, because "oh my god, video games!".

Wanting to expose your children to realities beyond those as depicted by popular media is a thoughtful thing to do. Not so much when it's a swift over-reaction to "OMG VIDEO GAMES!".

And, really, the truth seems more to be "freelance journalist does a freelance journalist thing and uses his kids as fodder for more freelance journalism". What do you figure the odds are he'd be doing this and documenting it if, say, he were a flight mechanic or a plumber and there weren't some other benefit besides that to his children?

If the US DoD were spending enormous amounts of money developing those comic books with the express purpose of making war look as glamorous and consequence-free as possible, then yes, I would still let my kids read them, because I disagree with intellectual censorship in any form, at any age. But you can bet I'd talk with them about what they were reading, who wrote it, and why they might have written it.

If the US DoD were spending enormous amounts of money developing those comic books with the express purpose of making war look as glamorous and consequence-free as possible, then yes, I would still let my kids read them, because I disagree with intellectual censorship in any form, at any age. But you can bet I'd talk with them about what they were reading, who wrote it, and why they might have written it.

And what does this have to do with the article? As far as I can tell, the US DoD has nothing to do wit

Would you do it if they were reading comic books about war? Watching movies? Watching 50s movies with John Wayne about war? Reading novels about war? Playing war in the yard? If they started playing cops and robbers in the back yard with the neighbor kids, is it time to haul them off to a Scared Straight session at a prison, to impress upon them the harsh realities of a life of crime?

I think that every American should have to take a trip to the war zone to see what our tax dollars go to supporting.

This whole story is a tale of over-reaction that only seemed to have occurred, because "oh my god, video games!".

Or maybe it's just a father trying to raise his children to be good humans. Nah!

Wanting to expose your children to realities beyond those as depicted by popular media is a thoughtful thing to do. Not so much when it's a swift over-reaction to "OMG VIDEO GAMES!".

How do you know it was an over reaction? Were you there when they were discussing it? Maybe they're just a really thoughtful family. Also, what about the children who are already in the middle of the war zone? I don't see anyone wanting to try to mitigate that.

And, really, the truth seems more to be "freelance journalist does a freelance journalist thing and uses his kids as fodder for more freelance journalism". What do you figure the odds are he'd be doing this and documenting it if, say, he were a flight mechanic or a plumber and there weren't some other benefit besides that to his children?

A plumber or flight mechanic going there with their kids? Maybe. Documenting it? Doubtful, as they generally tend to not make documentaries.

I like how you stated it as "uses his kids as fodder." I'd put it more as "Family man sees opportunities to teach his children to become good stewards of the planet, and documents it to try to help others do the same."

Would you do it if they were reading comic books about war? Watching movies? Watching 50s movies with John Wayne about war? Reading novels about war? Playing war in the yard? If they started playing cops and robbers in the back yard with the neighbor kids, is it time to haul them off to a Scared Straight session at a prison, to impress upon them the harsh realities of a life of crime?

I think that every American should have to take a trip to the war zone to see what our tax dollars go to supporting.

Much more practical: send elected representatives on those trips.

Shut down the congressional cafeterias for a few months out of the year to pay for it, or IDK, tell them there's free hookers and blow in Libya.

While this is sarcasm, lots of kids today are soft and don't equate hard work to earning something. They don't value half of what they have. Heck, they have little concept of why education is important. Too much instant gratification over trivial things.

So what you're saying here is that it's all well and good to 'teach your kids a lesson' by dropping them into a war zone and exposing them to potential harm. Be it from a stray rocket, random explosion, or imagery that may give them a LIFE TIME OF PTSD... all because some guy got all bhutt hurt that his kids like Call of Duty?

If I said to my son "you can play any games you want", I certainly would not mean (and he certainly wouldn't think I meant) that I will buy him any games he wants. He would still have to buy, pirate (or download, if it's free), or otherwise acquire the games by himself - or talk me into buying the game for him (it's not like I won't ever give him anything for free. but that promise isn't promise to give any game(s) to the kid for free).

No, seriously. This guy was thinking of his children.
I think it's great that he wants to give them a dose of reality. I think a lot of us in the US (and not just kids) could use that kind of experience.
Does it pose some risk to the kids? Yeah, sure. Growing up has all sorts of risks.
Which is why some of us never do.

Think of the fact that something like this might give them PTSD. Dealing with a war zone can be traumatic for adults with training, experience, and perspective. It can be far worse for children.

Also it does rather seem to be an unnecessary risk. While childhood has risks to be sure, part of your duty as a guardian is to minimize those risks as feasible. You weigh risks vs rewards, and try to find safe options when possible.

So maybe taking kids to a war zone is not the best idea. Maybe a better idea is to ta

Doing something for your country? Like committing murder for political theater?

It's been a long time since the US was in a war. We're not out there fighting to protect good people from bad people; we're out there fighting to protect politicians from voters who have too much time to think, and bankers from beardslims who buy their oil in gold.

there's an easy way to get that experience: enlist, serve, spend some time doing something for your country

From TFA:

two sons, Frank and Leo, aged ten and 11

I don't believe they are eligible for enlistment in Sweden; indeed, Iran is in a three-way tie for youngest military service [wikipedia.org] at age 15.

I don't fault your recommendation. Rather, having a limited but real exposure to such situations might even encourage them to serve in the military.Let's not forget there are other ways to serve your country and the people around you. I don't think Military service is even the best way (although I do think it a good one).

I remember asking mom about wars and things like that at around age 5 or 6.
While she probably didn't go into every detail, she tried to explain those topics to me and didn't tell
me that kids shouldn't think about such things. If you have smart, resilient kids I see no good reason
for all the coddling and shielding.

Not sure if the one you watched was "WWII in Colour" (by the History channel) on Netflix or not, but I watched that one and it was absolutely amazing, both in terms of its content, as well as the video production. Some of the film clips were still of poor quality even after restoration, (IIRC, a lot of clips they would have gotten from Russian archives were really bad), but in general the quality was phenomenal, all things concerned. You can also watch it for free online [ovguide.com], apparently. Definitely worth your time, and I also plan on (re) watching this with my kids when they get a little older, too.

What the dad is doing is trying to influence his kid's decision to engage with a fictional version of war by taking them to an actual war. What I meant is that the experience of the reality of war has nothing to do with the experience of playing a war video game, because one is an experience of something fictional and the other isn't. It's the difference between having sex and looking at porn, between watching the food network and eating, between watching CSI and being murdered. When you watch CSI, you know

I've heard that a few times over the years. Americans don't know what war is like because we've never had to suffer it personally. Our soldiers always go somewhere else to fight.

So, I say this sounds like a perfect education. You kids like playing war? Lets go see what war really is because games & stories don't do it justice. Look it in the eyes and you won't treat it like a game anymore.

When they're adults, these kids will be able to look back and use this experience to make an informed decision on whether or not to fight in whatever conflict their country gets into. Sweden's next generation of decision makers will be better equipped because of the presence of these kid's experience.

What would the dad have done if this were around eight years ago and his kids wanted to play Persona 3? Live demonstration of how shooting yourself in the head with a handgun doesn't cause physical manifestations of Jungian psychology to come out and fight demons and/or date unrealistic Japanese girls for you?

Ask someone, anyone, who has been to a region in which people fight to survive, and has to the smallest extent, even by simply talking to those people, shared their experiences. Unfailingly, the person will tell you that the experience changed his or her perspective, and that since then he is better, larger, more generous.

If you starve for a few days for the lack of food, a spoonful of plain, white, unsalted rice will taste better than the richest gourmet meal. My memory of the bowl of rice I had after 4 days of hunger is a calming, delicious memory. It was not the relief of having got food - but my whole body rejoicing from the taste of the soft, wholesome, starchy taste filling up in my mouth - a taste that I had not recognized until then.

We in the west are shielded from the harsh realities of life, little do we know that we are not exempt of them, we only ignore them, until one day it becomes impossible to do so. But if you have to face such realities then the perverse suffering caused by banalities - Internet connection going down, personal relationship problems simply dither away into insignificance.

I think it would be beneficial to society as a whole if every education included such encounters which teach people that life cannot be compared to the boom and splat of video games.

By that reasoning ithe subject of the game doesn't have to be war. If the kids play Fruit Ninja the dad should take them to a poverty-striken third world country that is having a food shortage, so they no longer want to trivialize the act of destroying food. As you said, starvation is something that Westerners are normally shielded from. "You're teaching people that life cannot be compared to the boom and splat of video games".

Call of Duty is nothing like actual war. instead, you should make the kids go camping for 3 days with nothing but ritz crackers, peanut butter and beef jerky. at the end, when they want to come home, phone them and let them know they did a great job so they get to camp for 3 more days. Occasionally drop off toilet paper and a roll of smartys, tell them its good for their morale. At the end of this 3 days, insist they stay 3 more days but this time leave a gas generator running next to the tent. If this

Not to mention in an actual war you occasionally run into insane people. Like me. I have some weird form of sociopathy that prevents me from meshing with people and forming cohesive social groups; I'd tend to turn violently on anyone who commits moral atrocities, and protect anyone who appears weak and harmless. You just can't do that in America.

My oldest has just gotten into Mario Kart 8. Should I strap him into the car, drive it down the highway at insane speeds, and have him toss objects out of the windows at other cars? Maybe I'm doing parenting wrong.

Typical American - "You're not raising your children the way I think children should be raised, so you're wrong!"

At least, it sure as hell seems that way. It's understandable to want to call obviously bad parents on obviously egregious acts, like beating a child, but we 'Muricans take it to the next level, demanding government action any time someone wants to rear their own offspring in a way that certain segments of society have deemed unfit.

Typical American - "You're not raising your children the way I think children should be raised, so you're wrong!"

At least, it sure as hell seems that way.

That is a human problem, not an American problem. Everybody on this planet is sure their way of life is the correct way. That is why everybody laughs at the fat, dumb, lazy, violent, American kids. Because they have different priorities.

My dad did that, but for fairly different reasons. His friends convinced him that their area of Yugoslavia was pretty unimpacted by fighting, so we visited. It was honestly one of the more interesting vacations I've taken; the entire country was completely economically devistated. Fortunately I don't think any of the involved governments (we're American) ever found out about that somewhat irresponsible vacation.

Soon after returning from Syria, one of the boys didn't want to go to school because he had a sniffle and a mild fever. So next month the family is packing up again for another trip - this time to West Africa to visit with families affected by the Ebola outbreak. While they're there, with any luck, they will be able to stumble upon a village completely wiped out by the virus. While some have labeled the plan ill timed and the motivations just plain sick, the father hopes that the children will come to appreciate their health if they can interview a dying infectee with blood spewing from every orifice.

Meanwhile, the boys have withdrawn their requests to go see the new Hunger Games movie, and no longer complain about being hot, cold, bored, or anything else.

It's a grayer area than that. Blasting Nazis on Mars or whatever was one thing, but the US Department of Defense now throws millions of dollars at game developers, tasking them with making war look like just another extreme sport.

IMHO (and in the opinion of most credible researchers) even these games are not directly psychologically damaging to young people. But I don't like the message they are engineered to send. It sounds like this father has found a great way to give his kids an inside look at the game they're really being trained to play.

I'm going to guess that the video game angle is kind of irrelevant. He took his kids from a very wealthy, stable country -- to go see how the other half live. They received first hand, a very real lesson in the way the world works.

Kids should be taught that war is horrible, but that sometimes that horribleness needs to be undertaken to prevent something even worse. I don't agree with the "War is never the answer" bumper stickers I see here and there, but war should never be the first answer. War should be our last option after all other options are exhausted. You should beware of people who either a) think that you should never engage in war ever or b) are itching to rush into a war. The former will let atrocities happen while th

The issue, is that you have governments that dont know the meaning of a peaceful "no."

You know, like,

"Hey bro-- I see you have lots of untapped oil resources. Would you please make some backroom deals with me so I can get some of it real cheap? I'll give you all the stuff to get it out of the ground for a reasonable bait and switch arrangement..."

There is a big difference between "war should be considered as a last resort to get our way" and "war shouldn't be considered at all except as a way to prevent something even worse" (where the list of things considered "worse than war" is extremely short). Whether war is justified at all is a more important issue than where it ranks on a list of options, though I do agree that other options should always come first.

For me the D-day scene in Saving Private Ryan was sobering. The sound the bullets made when hitting metal hit home for some reason, in a much more powerful fashion than just seeing someone get shot. The sound they made hinted at exactly what one of those would do to you if you got hit.